1940 US census
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Robert Melson
Re: 1940 US census
In article <AIwKi.15188$nO3.5244@edtnps90>,
"jburns" <johnburns@telus.net> writes:
IIRC, there's a 72 year gap between when the census was
taken and when it's released.
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
"People unfit for freedom---who cannot do much with it---are
hungry for power." ---Eric Hoffer
"jburns" <johnburns@telus.net> writes:
I wonder when the 1940 US census will be released.
John
What's 40 + 72?
IIRC, there's a 72 year gap between when the census was
taken and when it's released.
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
"People unfit for freedom---who cannot do much with it---are
hungry for power." ---Eric Hoffer
-
Scruffy McScruffovitch
Re: 1940 US census
"jburns" <johnburns@telus.net> wrote in message
news:AIwKi.15188$nO3.5244@edtnps90...
They are released 72 years after they are taken. So the 1940 Census will be
released in 2012.
news:AIwKi.15188$nO3.5244@edtnps90...
I wonder when the 1940 US census will be released.
John
They are released 72 years after they are taken. So the 1940 Census will be
released in 2012.
-
singhals
Re: 1940 US census
jburns wrote:
The 72-year statuatory privacy bar lifts in 2012. However,
just because the privacy restriction is lifted, it doesn't
_necessarily_ mean anyone is going to film or digitize it
for public use. Those things cost money and NARA doesn't
have any.
Cheryl
I wonder when the 1940 US census will be released.
John
The 72-year statuatory privacy bar lifts in 2012. However,
just because the privacy restriction is lifted, it doesn't
_necessarily_ mean anyone is going to film or digitize it
for public use. Those things cost money and NARA doesn't
have any.
Cheryl
-
Robert Melson
Re: 1940 US census
In article <LKmdnWGNEceELWfbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@rcn.net>,
singhals <singhals@erols.com> writes:
Good point! Just because it's released doesn't mean it will
be available in any useful format. How long did it take, e.g.,
Ancestry, to index the '30 census after its release in '02?
Sigh. Gonna have to hold on to 2022, myself.
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
"People unfit for freedom---who cannot do much with it---are
hungry for power." ---Eric Hoffer
singhals <singhals@erols.com> writes:
jburns wrote:
I wonder when the 1940 US census will be released.
John
The 72-year statuatory privacy bar lifts in 2012. However,
just because the privacy restriction is lifted, it doesn't
_necessarily_ mean anyone is going to film or digitize it
for public use. Those things cost money and NARA doesn't
have any.
Cheryl
Good point! Just because it's released doesn't mean it will
be available in any useful format. How long did it take, e.g.,
Ancestry, to index the '30 census after its release in '02?
Sigh. Gonna have to hold on to 2022, myself.
Bob
--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
"People unfit for freedom---who cannot do much with it---are
hungry for power." ---Eric Hoffer
-
Henry Brownlee
Re: 1940 US census
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:LKmdnWGNEceELWfbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@rcn.net...
| jburns wrote:
|
| > I wonder when the 1940 US census will be released.
| > John
|
| The 72-year statuatory privacy bar lifts in 2012. However,
| just because the privacy restriction is lifted, it doesn't
| _necessarily_ mean anyone is going to film or digitize it
| for public use. Those things cost money and NARA doesn't
| have any.
|
| Cheryl
I wonder if the WPA workers were microfilming Census returns in 1940, or if
they had stopped that make-work operation by then?
Henry
news:LKmdnWGNEceELWfbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@rcn.net...
| jburns wrote:
|
| > I wonder when the 1940 US census will be released.
| > John
|
| The 72-year statuatory privacy bar lifts in 2012. However,
| just because the privacy restriction is lifted, it doesn't
| _necessarily_ mean anyone is going to film or digitize it
| for public use. Those things cost money and NARA doesn't
| have any.
|
| Cheryl
I wonder if the WPA workers were microfilming Census returns in 1940, or if
they had stopped that make-work operation by then?
Henry
-
the_verminator@comcast.ne
Re: 1940 US census
An article dated May 2003 in Ancestry Magazine tells about how to use
the 1930 census so it was online before then..
so say a bit less that18 months or so.
On Sep 26, 2:40 pm, mels...@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote:
the 1930 census so it was online before then..
so say a bit less that18 months or so.
On Sep 26, 2:40 pm, mels...@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote:
Good point! Just because it's released doesn't mean it will
be available in any useful format. How long did it take, e.g.,
Ancestry, to index the '30 census after its release in '02?
Sigh. Gonna have to hold on to 2022, myself.
Bob
-
Chris Shearer Cooper
Re: 1940 US census
But, as somebody pointed out, Ancestry has money to burn, and will
undoubtedly throw a lot of people on the project.
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:LKmdnWGNEceELWfbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@rcn.net...
undoubtedly throw a lot of people on the project.
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:LKmdnWGNEceELWfbnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@rcn.net...
jburns wrote:
I wonder when the 1940 US census will be released.
John
The 72-year statuatory privacy bar lifts in 2012. However, just because
the privacy restriction is lifted, it doesn't _necessarily_ mean anyone is
going to film or digitize it for public use. Those things cost money and
NARA doesn't have any.
Cheryl
-
Henry Brownlee
Re: 1940 US census
"Chris Shearer Cooper" <chrisnews@sc3.net> wrote in message
news:13fm9k78s2phc5f@corp.supernews.com...
| But, as somebody pointed out, Ancestry has money to burn, and will
| undoubtedly throw a lot of people on the project.
Probably so. But I hope they use people who are more careful and have
better eyesight than some who transcribed previous censuses (or is that
censii?).
One can seldom search for an exact name on Ancestry and find what one
seeks. Enumerators' spelling errors (or lack of strict spelling protocol in
past ages) are bad enough, but some of the transcriptions I have found
are ridiculous. Try researching a name like MARTINY by entering
MARTIN* and see what you have to wade through! (And probably
still not find your targeted forebear.) Then again, maybe it's just my
brood that has those problems. ;>]
--
Henry Brownlee
Houma, Louisiana
news:13fm9k78s2phc5f@corp.supernews.com...
| But, as somebody pointed out, Ancestry has money to burn, and will
| undoubtedly throw a lot of people on the project.
Probably so. But I hope they use people who are more careful and have
better eyesight than some who transcribed previous censuses (or is that
censii?).
One can seldom search for an exact name on Ancestry and find what one
seeks. Enumerators' spelling errors (or lack of strict spelling protocol in
past ages) are bad enough, but some of the transcriptions I have found
are ridiculous. Try researching a name like MARTINY by entering
MARTIN* and see what you have to wade through! (And probably
still not find your targeted forebear.) Then again, maybe it's just my
brood that has those problems. ;>]
--
Henry Brownlee
Houma, Louisiana
-
Dennis
Re: 1940 US census
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 09:22:40 -0500, "Henry Brownlee"
<hfbrownl@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I presume you know that you can also search ancestry.com using the '?'
wildcard character.
--
Dennis
<hfbrownl@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Try researching a name like MARTINY by entering
MARTIN* and see what you have to wade through!
I presume you know that you can also search ancestry.com using the '?'
wildcard character.
--
Dennis
-
Henry Brownlee
Re: 1940 US census
"Dennis" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:khgnf3poefqqprnkuvaml68rse80fmf8ii@4ax.com...
| On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 09:22:40 -0500, "Henry Brownlee"
| <hfbrownl@bellsouth.net> wrote:
|
| >Try researching a name like MARTINY by entering
| >MARTIN* and see what you have to wade through!
|
| I presume you know that you can also search ancestry.com using the '?'
| wildcard character.
|
| --
|
| Dennis
Dennis,
Oui, je sais! But that only gets you the next character - in searching that
family I have found them indexed as MARTINYH, MARTINEZ, and several other
spellings. That's why I used the (*). Of course, I have also found some of
them as MARTINI.
Guess you're getting a bit cool up north, aren't you? We still have pretty
warm days here, although not as stifling as they had been.
Best wishes from Louisiana,
--
Henry F. Brownlee
Hunting Forebears
news:khgnf3poefqqprnkuvaml68rse80fmf8ii@4ax.com...
| On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 09:22:40 -0500, "Henry Brownlee"
| <hfbrownl@bellsouth.net> wrote:
|
| >Try researching a name like MARTINY by entering
| >MARTIN* and see what you have to wade through!
|
| I presume you know that you can also search ancestry.com using the '?'
| wildcard character.
|
| --
|
| Dennis
Dennis,
Oui, je sais! But that only gets you the next character - in searching that
family I have found them indexed as MARTINYH, MARTINEZ, and several other
spellings. That's why I used the (*). Of course, I have also found some of
them as MARTINI.
Guess you're getting a bit cool up north, aren't you? We still have pretty
warm days here, although not as stifling as they had been.
Best wishes from Louisiana,
--
Henry F. Brownlee
Hunting Forebears
-
Dennis
Re: 1940 US census
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 12:46:56 -0500, "Henry Brownlee"
<hfbrownl@bellsouth.net> wrote:
You can always use "martin?*".
Good luck with your search!
--
Dennis
<hfbrownl@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Oui, je sais! But that only gets you the next character - in searching that
family I have found them indexed as MARTINYH, MARTINEZ, and several other
spellings. That's why I used the (*). Of course, I have also found some of
them as MARTINI.
You can always use "martin?*".
Good luck with your search!
--
Dennis
-
Gjest
Re: 1940 US census
But I hope they use people who are more
careful and have better eyesight than some
who transcribed previous censuses (or is that
censii?).
That would mean hiring folks here in the US of A rather than
out-sourcing it to people unfamiliar with the names here.
toot
-
Henry Brownlee
Re: 1940 US census
<tootncmon@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:16286-470E75A2-208@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net...
| >But I hope they use people who are more
| >careful and have better eyesight than some
| >who transcribed previous censuses (or is that
| >censii?).
|
| That would mean hiring folks here in the US of A rather than
| out-sourcing it to people unfamiliar with the names here.
|
| toot
|
Hey Toot,
Yep! But of course they would never do that, would they? But in looking at
M/F of some of the returns here, one has to wonder where the government
enlisted the enumerators themselves.
Beep! Beep!
Cmon!
Henry
news:16286-470E75A2-208@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net...
| >But I hope they use people who are more
| >careful and have better eyesight than some
| >who transcribed previous censuses (or is that
| >censii?).
|
| That would mean hiring folks here in the US of A rather than
| out-sourcing it to people unfamiliar with the names here.
|
| toot
|
Hey Toot,
Yep! But of course they would never do that, would they? But in looking at
M/F of some of the returns here, one has to wonder where the government
enlisted the enumerators themselves.
Beep! Beep!
Cmon!
Henry